Toto jsou krátká cvičení, která se týkají úvodu a struktury práce. Studenti také písemně zpracují a odevzdají úvod k seminární práci dle doporučení vycházejících z přednášek a zadané literatury. Rozsah úvodu 200-350 slov. Zároveň vypracují návrh struktury práce se stručným popisem obsahu jednotlivých kapitol v rozsahu 250-500 slov. 1) Každý úvod do odborného textu by měl obsahovat následující části: obecnější uvedení do tématu, upřesnění zaměření samotného textu, popis postupu a (v tomto případě tomu tak ne vždy musí být) krátké shrnutí výsledků. V textu od Duncana MacDonnella níže označte barevně příslušné pasáže: obecnější uvedení do tématu (červeně), zpřesnění zaměření samotného textu, resp. formulace cíle (žlutě), popis postupu (zeleně), shrnutí výsledků (modře). Ballots and Billions: Clive Palmer’s Personal Catch-all Party What do billionaires do when they can no longer rely on the political party they have been generously supporting? While the obvious reaction might be to find another, for tycoons like Silvio Berlusconi in Italy and Clive Palmer in Australia, the answer has been to create their own. They are not the only ones to have done so. As Darrell West (2014: 93-94) notes, ‘instead of simply influencing public policy from the sidelines, billionaires have sought public office in thirteen countries during the past decade’. These include the likes of Andrej Babiš in the Czech Republic, Frank Stronach in Austria and Bidzina Ivanishvili in Georgia, all of whom have founded their own parties in the last five years. With considerable success too. Babiš, Ivanishvili and Berlusconi all finished up in government after their first general elections, with the latter two leaders becoming prime minister straight away. While Stronach and Palmer did not get into power, both achieved what were arguably the best debut general election results in their respective countries in at least the past twenty years. In this article, we examine Palmer and his eponymous Palmer United Party (PUP) – the newest case in an established democracy of what we might call ‘plutocrat parties’. Founded in April 2013, PUP has been lavishly funded by its creator. According to the party’s official 2013-2014 accounts, around 25 million dollars of its 28 million total spend came from Palmer and his companies, with the remaining amount being electoral reimbursements (AEC 2015). Since there has been no academic study to date of PUP, our aim in this article is threefold and in part exploratory: we will seek to locate the party ideologically; we will analyse it organizationally; and we will consider the implications of PUP’s emergence, success and failures for Australian party politics. We have two guiding hypotheses. Firstly, given that it was created and is led by a billionaire businessman, we would expect PUP to possess a fairly clear neoliberal ideology. Secondly, given that it was founded by a single individual (on whom it is overwhelmingly financially dependent), organisationally we would expect PUP to be what has been termed a ‘personal party’ (McDonnell, 2013). In other words, like Berlusconi’s Forza Italia, it should be very much a leader-focused party, with little grassroots organisation and with strong doubts regarding the party’s future viability in the absence of the leader (Ibid.). To investigate these questions, we rely on original documentary sources such as official party literature (including items not publicly available), PUP’s voting record in parliament, its press releases and television advertisements. We also base our discussion on twenty interviews conducted with PUP Federal and State candidates and several high-level figures between January and March 2015. This sample included interviewees from Western Australia, New South Wales, Victoria, Tasmania, Queensland and the Australian Capital Territory. All spoke on condition of anonymity. As the following sections detail, the picture that emerges from our research is one of a party which is utterly dominated by its leader, which was never built to last and whose ideology cannot be easily classified under any label other than ‘catch-all’. While PUP’s star now seems to be very much in decline, we conclude that its success shows that more professionalised new personal parties in Australia should be able to do well in the future. 2) Následující text je autentický úvod jednoho z publikovaných odborných textů. Jeho jednotlivé části jsou označeny písmeny a) – e), ale oproti původnímu (logickému) pořadí zpřeházeny. Vaším úkolem je přeskládat jednotlivé části tak, aby dávaly smysl a logicky na sebe navazovaly. Introduction a) Such studies of party positions tend to study left–right or other policy dimensions like Europeanization. They have yielded many valuable insights but are not directly aimed at understanding how political parties make decisions on concrete policy issues. Yet it is these specific policy issues like whether the pension age should be raised or extending more rights to same-sex couples that end up affecting the lives of citizens. There is also evidence that public preferences on specific policy issues are not strongly linked to the public’s positions on dimensions, indicating that studying specific issues is a valuable addition to the field (Lesschaeve, 2017). Studies on the link between public opinion and policy outputs have studied specific policy issues (e.g. Gilens, 2012; Lax and Phillips, 2012), allowing them to complement findings from previous studies that considered policy scales (e.g. Stimson et al., 1995). Although the approach has its drawbacks, it is increasingly propagated because it provides insights into the concrete policies that are delivered to citizens and ensures a direct match between public preferences and policy (Wlezien, 2016). b) In many normative definitions of democratic systems, political parties are expected to represent their voters and pursue the policies they promised to deliver (e.g. Mair, 2008) to ensure a link between the preferences of the public and policy outcomes (Dahl, 1956). It is thus unsurprising that a literature has emerged studying who political parties represent when they take policy positions.1 One influential strand of literature argues that niche parties are different to mainstream parties, because mainstream parties seeking to maximize their vote share will cater to the median voter, whereas niche parties that are more policy-seeking will respond to the preferences of their supporters (e.g. Adams et al., 2006). Recently, scholars have also argued that political parties in government are constrained by coalition agreements and their responsibility to implement election promises. This means that unlike parties in opposition, they are less able to respond to the issue priorities of the public (Klüver and Spoon, 2016). c) The results show that there is a link between public preferences and the positions of political parties. However, the article finds little evidence for the expected differences between niche and mainstream parties. The analysis indicates that the link between public preferences and party positions disappears once parties enter government, whereas the link with the preferences of party supporters is weakened but not severed. The study thus contributes to the literature on policy and party representation and illustrates the advantages of studying specific policy issues. d) To do this, the study assesses the positions of political parties in the German Bundestag on 102 specific policy proposals in the period between 1998 and 2010. The issues concern possible policy changes like raising the taxes on petrol or increasing the size of the German military deployment in Afghanistan. The article records statements by political parties about these policy issues in two major newspapers to investigate whether the preferences of the general public and party supporters are represented in these claims. e) This article contributes to both the literature on the public–party and the public–policy linkages by exploring the link between public opinion and political parties on specific policy issues. It considers whether the policy positions of political parties are related to the preferences of the general public or their supporters, and whether this relationship is dependent on whether a party is a niche or mainstream party and in or out of government. 3) V semináři jsme se zmínili o tzv. otvírácích, tj. prvních větách celého článku (a tedy I úvodu), které uvádějí celý text a mají upoutat čtenářovu pozornost. V odborných textech (časopisech) dle vašeho výběru v anglickém, českém nebo slovenském jazyce najděte pět takových otvíráků, které vás zaujmou (ideálně různého typu). Otvíráky sem nakopírujte a doplňte bibliografických záznamem daného článku.